The importance of membrane for treatment of waste water is growing rapidly. It is now well known that membrane processes can be used as an effective tertiary treatment of sewage and provide quality effluent. However, the capital and operating cost can be prohibitive. With the arrival of submerged membrane processes where the membrane modules are immersed in a large feed tank and filtrate is collected through suction applied to the filtrate side of the membrane, membrane bioreactors combining biological and physical processes in one stage promise to be more compact, efficient and economic. Due to their versatility, the size of membrane bioreactors can range from household (such as septic tank systems) to the community and large-scale sewage treatment.
The success of a membrane filtration process largely depends on employing an effective and efficient membrane cleaning method. Commonly used physical cleaning methods include backwash (backpulse, backflush) using a liquid permeate or a gas, membrane surface scrubbing or scouring using a gas in the form of bubbles in a liquid. Examples of the second type of method is illustrated in U.S. Pat. No. 5,192,456 to Ishida et al, U.S. Pat. No. 5,248,424 to Cote et al, U.S. Pat. No. 5,639,373 to Henshaw et al, U.S. Pat. No. 5,783,083 to Henshaw et al and our PCT Application No. WO98/28066.
In the examples referred to above, a gas is injected, usually by means of a pressurised blower, into a liquid system where a membrane module is submerged to form gas bubbles. The bubbles so formed then travel upwards to scrub the membrane surface to remove the fouling substances formed on the membrane surface. The shear force produced largely relies on the initial gas bubble velocity, bubble size and the resultant of forces applied to the bubbles. The fluid transfer in this approach is limited to the effectiveness of the gas lifting mechanism. To enhance the scrubbing effect, more gas has to be supplied. However, this method has several disadvantages: it consumes large amounts of energy, possibly forms mist or froth flow reducing effective membrane filtration area, and may be destructive to membranes. Moreover, in an environment of high concentration of solids, the gas distribution system may gradually become blocked by dehydrated solids or simply be blocked when the gas flow accidentally ceases.
For most tubular membrane modules, the membranes are flexible in the middle (longitudinal directions) of the modules but tend to be tighter and less flexible towards to both potted heads. When such modules: are used in an environment containing high concentrations of suspended solids, solids are easily trapped within the membrane bundle, especially in the proximity of two potted heads. The methods to reduce the accumulation of solids include the improvement of module configurations and flow distribution when gas scrubbing is used to clean the membranes.
In the design of a membrane module, the packing density of the tubular membranes in a module is an important factor. The packing density of the fibre membranes in a membrane module as used herein is defined as the cross-sectional potted area taken up by the fibre membranes divided by the total potted area and is normally expressed as, a percentage. From the economical viewpoint it is desirable that the packing density be as high as possible to reduce the cost of making membrane modules. In practice solid packing is reduced in a less densely packed membrane module. However, if the packing density is too low, the rubbing effect between membranes could also be lessened, resulting in less efficient scrubbing/scouring of the membrane surfaces. It is, thus desirable to provide a membrane configuration which assists removal of accumulated solids while maximising packing density of the membranes.